← New Search ↗ Social Card

Grant Cruikshank Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-07-19 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2014-15 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2016-17 Penticton Vees BCHL 57 32 21 53 0.930 0.3583 0.3707 1.3523 1.3992
2017-18 Penticton Vees BCHL 25 11 10 21 0.840 0.3237 0.3194 1.2217 1.2054
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2022-23 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC — 41 23 15 38 0.927
2021-22 Minnesota D1 BigTen — 33 7 8 15 0.455
2020-21 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 16 8 2 10 0.625
2019-20 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 34 11 6 17 0.500
2018-19 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 40 11 7 18 0.450
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.45
2018-19 · Colorado College
+54.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

57%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
42%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14078
Forward overall
#641
Forward born in 1998

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Vermont (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ UConn (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Salve Regina · 2018-19
1.259 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Adrian · 2012-13
1.536 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Endicott · 2023-24
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.